If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I typically use the open-source drivers until I start getting into stuff using extensive OpenGL, and I used the open-source drivers on the A8 for about a month. It's decent for everyday tasks, but just doesn't hold up with the 3D stuff.

Yes, thats why I went for Intel hardware instead of A8. I can't afford to risk this. On Intel, I know that hardware IntelHD sucks 3x compared to A8, but amd open driver performs at 10x slower rate, compared to Intel 1x, making Intel APU actually way faster than AMD. Plus SNA. And when I need performance, I think of nvidia GPU. Not much of opensource, but performs stable. And intel opensource and performs way faster. I think most people criticize AMD not due to opensource strategy, but due to how sadomasochistic it is. Badly performing driver will result in loss of customers, like myself,... its really sad. Thanks for response!

Unfortunately the same is true for me. I've been a long-time fan of AMD processors, but now with mainstream GPUs integrated into the CPU die, I do not want the hassle this would bring. I can see what happend to a friend of mine, he is complaining all the time :/
Better pay 200$ more and get first-class open-source drivers, than to use hardware which will be EOL before receiving proper drivers.

When is took amd for more then a year after they released my hd5750, to support it?
( and with support I mean a good working catalyst driver)

That is took Valve to get them to improve the drivers ?

Its only since a few months i notice an improvement of the drivers.

The reason I might get another amd card some day, is because of the opensource support, but more important it seems they changed their ways.

I don't think it took Valve to get them to improve the drivers. Catalyst 12.6 was a big turnaround for AMD, and Valve wasn't even close to a closed-beta of Steam then. The reason the performance of the drivers is still improving more recently "due to Valve" is that there is now a bigger interest in gaming on Linux than there ever has been, and Valve is playing a big role in that.

Originally Posted by brosis

Yes, thats why I went for Intel hardware instead of A8. I can't afford to risk this. On Intel, I know that hardware IntelHD sucks 3x compared to A8, but amd open driver performs at 10x slower rate, compared to Intel 1x, making Intel APU actually way faster than AMD. Plus SNA. And when I need performance, I think of nvidia GPU. Not much of opensource, but performs stable. And intel opensource and performs way faster. I think most people criticize AMD not due to opensource strategy, but due to how sadomasochistic it is. Badly performing driver will result in loss of customers, like myself,... its really sad. Thanks for response!

You aren't making any sense in this post. You don't want AMD because of open-source issues, yet you like Nvidia which lacks any real open-source support. Intel doesn't even have proprietary drivers on Linux, it's all open-source. The Intel APU is not faster, and I've run into issues with even recent Intel hardware (I'm talking Ivy Bridge here!) with OpenGL going as far back as OpenGL 1.3.

I guess what I'm saying is, you are saying the Intel GPU is 3x slower than the AMD GPU but then compare the open-source driver of the AMD GPU to the Intel GPU which then makes the Intel GPU 10x faster, yet when you need performance you want an Nvidia GPU which doesn't have real open-source support. That's a very unfair comparison. Throw AMD's proprietary drivers into the mix.

Originally Posted by Linuxhippy

Unfortunately the same is true for me. I've been a long-time fan of AMD processors, but now with mainstream GPUs integrated into the CPU die, I do not want the hassle this would bring. I can see what happend to a friend of mine, he is complaining all the time :/
Better pay 200$ more and get first-class open-source drivers, than to use hardware which will be EOL before receiving proper drivers.

I don't get what you're saying. "I've been a long-time fan of AMD processors, but now with mainstream GPUs integrated into the CPU die, I do not want the hassle this would bring." If you have a Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge CPU, it most likely has an integrated GPU (I say most likely because I remember there was at least 1 model that didn't have the integrated GPU), and there isn't any hassle with it. Also, Intel's open-source driver is first-class because it's their only driver.

I thought I'd chime in on this one. The last AMD/ATi hardware I bought for a while now was the x800 Pro and my experience with fglrx was nothing short of abysmal. It went to the point that I had to hose my Redhat install to fix my system. Since then, I've steered very much clearly away from their stuff.

That being said, I bought an HP Pavilion that came with the AMD hardware and the first thing I notice is that the open source driver makes the fan all noisy and chews up power like a hungry beast. Then I had issues with fglrx and my xorg version (1.13) until I grabbed the beta drivers. Since then, the power consumption seems OK and I can run fgl_glxgears now. LOL. I haven't tried the intel switchable graphics partially out of fear, but if anyone has experience on it, I'd like to hear them.

There is enough documentation for most Linux people to navigate through the AMD nightmare, but I think AMD drivers will always play catch up to nVIDIA. I care about driver performance and AMD's fglrx drivers seems to always have something to complain about. Just five minutes ago, my laptop hit screen saver and when I tried to reactivate it, only the second screen would activate. Go figure. Just the way it has to be with AMD.

If you have other issues you'd like to bring up, I'll offer a rebuttal.

Generally I like what AMD is doing. I switched from Nvidia in my desktop due to wanting to support a company that was working on open source drivers. However, there is problems that will probably result in my next laptop having an Intel chip rather than an AMD chip, and if you have truely been following the issues people are complaining about then you surely would have read it before.

Power usage, my laptop feels like a small heater I'm scared to leave it on when I'm not around as I fear it may cause my house to burn down, not to mention the short battery life when its not plugged into the wall. I cannot use the fglrx drivers as I found out recently that they only offer legacy drivers for my card now which dont run on my current distro.

So while I agree AMD are getting better I dont think they are as perfect as you are suggesting.

Some time ago AMD made a derogatory comment about hashcat-plus, they said they were not interested in our "little hash cracking program".

about a program being used by LOTS of people, corporations and govts all over the world, that could be even used by themselves for testing, etc., and to the very same people that recommends AMD products (and even clusters of them) over nVidia.
Talk about irony, huh?...
But, again, why are you loving corporations? Are you getting paid for spamming this forum or something? In that case, I would understand, yeah. We all need to eat (although some people still has ethics). Otherwise, you are just another retarded fanboi.

You aren't making any sense in this post. You don't want AMD because of open-source issues, yet you like Nvidia which lacks any real open-source support. Intel doesn't even have proprietary drivers on Linux, it's all open-source. The Intel APU is not faster, and I've run into issues with even recent Intel hardware (I'm talking Ivy Bridge here!) with OpenGL going as far back as OpenGL 1.3.

I guess what I'm saying is, you are saying the Intel GPU is 3x slower than the AMD GPU but then compare the open-source driver of the AMD GPU to the Intel GPU which then makes the Intel GPU 10x faster, yet when you need performance you want an Nvidia GPU which doesn't have real open-source support. That's a very unfair comparison. Throw AMD's proprietary drivers into the mix.

I don't like Nvidia, I prefer opensource drivers a lot. But in any case, the drivers should be stable and the hardware should perform well under them.

If I use opensource drivers, the 2D is much worse than Intel due to EXA vs SNA and the 3D is much worse due to Intel driver working faster than AMD and even managing to deliver better overall performance on much worse hardware. But the CPU part of Ivy destroys the A8. That - staying in same price class of 70$ APU.

If I use catalyst, well there is no point in any claim of any opensource drivers - is there? Then we compare closed source drivers vs closed source drivers - and in this case nvidia solution is more stable and has less bugs.

So in the end, weighting all realistic components it was: AMD+Catalyst vs Intel+open drivers, 3d performance and instability vs 2d performance and stability.
For desktop that I was targeting stability means a lot. And if my collegue decides he needs 3D performance, I can easily add 50$ nvidia card and have performance with better driver.

I can't risk purchasing A8, I will punish myself and affect my reputation by doing that. Sure AMD started opensourcing first, but it is Intel who does the opensource driver the way its meant to be and nvidia who does the closed driver since ages the way its meant to be.

In response you said, then "use catalyst", catalyst is completely and totally out of the question entirely. Which leads for me to "if AMD, then use ....". I wish you very best.

Sure I am!

..when I'm instaling windows 7/8 on it.

Same with others. I bought my lappie around time when Llano came out, but still chosed Intel. Don't wanna use something barely usefull (cause I know that I WILL install linux on it). The after-effect? Well, As someone whom others consult when choosing computer, I am almost always recommend Intel. So if someday they want to install linux on theirs, It won't make them cry

I really wish AMD open driver will someday on par with Intel (on quality)!